Evaluation of Different Internal Structure and Build Orientation for Multijet Modeling Process
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rapid Prototyping (RP) technology has proven its capability to produce complex parts with shorter lead time. This advantage could benefit tremendously in application such as the Investment Casting (IC) process. The focus of the study is the production of sacrificial IC patterns produced using Multijet Modeling (MJM) RP technology. It includes the evaluation of dimensional accuracy and the surface roughness of part with a hollow and quasi hollow inner support patterns. Different internal structure's pattern were developed using CAD software, and the part were fabricated using MJM technique in two different build orientations. Analyses were done using Coordinate Measuring Machine (CMM) and the surface roughness tester. Results show that part built with 90º orientation is better than part built with 0º orientation both in terms of accuracies and roughness. Different internal structure similarly affects the final part quality, though the post processing steps also have their influence, thus making it no clear different among the parts. However, it demonstrated parts with square structure produced the best dimensional accuracy and the part with hatch structure produced the best surface roughness.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it